This.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
If you can find a group that plays a pre-3.0 version of D&D or Retroclone would you:
- Thread starter joethelawyer
- Start date
This.
Shemeska
Adventurer
Are you including 3e in that "older editions" group? Or just 2e and earlier?
No problem at all in my area finding 3e players - probably more 3e than 4e locally as far as people I know, and people looking for gaming groups as I've noticed.
As far as older than 3e, it depends on the group, the DM, and the setting. Planescape, Dark Sun, and Ravenloft I'd happily use 2e rules to get into a campaign in any of them. But at the moment, I have no time to join any more games than I'm already running or already playing in.
No problem at all in my area finding 3e players - probably more 3e than 4e locally as far as people I know, and people looking for gaming groups as I've noticed.
As far as older than 3e, it depends on the group, the DM, and the setting. Planescape, Dark Sun, and Ravenloft I'd happily use 2e rules to get into a campaign in any of them. But at the moment, I have no time to join any more games than I'm already running or already playing in.
No interest in older editions.
I... kind of hate the alleged "old school revolution." I think its bad for gaming as a whole.
Let me try to explain...
Basically, there are some good things about older games. Unfortunately, there are also some bad things*. The old school afficianados have a nostalgic connection to the older games that causes them to assume that it was the older game itself that was fun, and not just the good parts being fun in spite of the bad parts. So they play older games or create older clones that faithfully recreate everything they remember, bad parts and all. Unfortunately this means that the good parts that are no longer that fashionable are only found in games that contain the bad parts.
I just feel like some important gaming technology is in the hands of people who don't fully understand it, and who, as a result, continue faithfully reproducing warts from the original games. I'd be interested in seeing someone really break down what it was about their view of "old school" gaming that was fun, and what rules facilitated it and what didn't. And then seeing them create a game that distinctively catered to that style of play. It might be totally incompatible with someone else's vision of old school gaming, but I'm ok with that.
Probably someone's got a lead on this already and I don't know about it, because I'm only peripherally in touch with the old school community, but this is my general take on the subject: old school would appeal to me a lot more if it stopped trying to recreate the gaming experiences of people's youths, and started trying to create new games based on the better, presently-neglected aspects of certain older games.
*I am also including in the phrase "bad things" rules that are good for certain styles of game but not for the particular one being used. In a different type of "old school" game the good and bad things might switch roles. Perhaps the optimal phrase would be "unsuitable things."
I... kind of hate the alleged "old school revolution." I think its bad for gaming as a whole.
Let me try to explain...
Basically, there are some good things about older games. Unfortunately, there are also some bad things*. The old school afficianados have a nostalgic connection to the older games that causes them to assume that it was the older game itself that was fun, and not just the good parts being fun in spite of the bad parts. So they play older games or create older clones that faithfully recreate everything they remember, bad parts and all. Unfortunately this means that the good parts that are no longer that fashionable are only found in games that contain the bad parts.
I just feel like some important gaming technology is in the hands of people who don't fully understand it, and who, as a result, continue faithfully reproducing warts from the original games. I'd be interested in seeing someone really break down what it was about their view of "old school" gaming that was fun, and what rules facilitated it and what didn't. And then seeing them create a game that distinctively catered to that style of play. It might be totally incompatible with someone else's vision of old school gaming, but I'm ok with that.
Probably someone's got a lead on this already and I don't know about it, because I'm only peripherally in touch with the old school community, but this is my general take on the subject: old school would appeal to me a lot more if it stopped trying to recreate the gaming experiences of people's youths, and started trying to create new games based on the better, presently-neglected aspects of certain older games.
*I am also including in the phrase "bad things" rules that are good for certain styles of game but not for the particular one being used. In a different type of "old school" game the good and bad things might switch roles. Perhaps the optimal phrase would be "unsuitable things."
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
As I've said in other threads, it's all about the group.
I wouldn't play my own game with a group I didn't like, but with a solid group, I'd play pretty much anything.
Retroclones are usually even better than normal "older editions," so they'd get an enthusiastic try from me.
I wouldn't play my own game with a group I didn't like, but with a solid group, I'd play pretty much anything.
Retroclones are usually even better than normal "older editions," so they'd get an enthusiastic try from me.
Gothmog
First Post
Sure, I'd sign up for a long-term 1e/2e AD&D game in a heartbeat. We still play 1e/2e a few times a year, and one of my buddies is going to start running a monthly AD&D 1e game when he gets back from vacation in late June! Another guy in our group has expressed interest in running a Ravenloft 2e game as well, but some health issues have him preoccupied right now.
As for 3e, no way in hell. Been there, done that, and I find 3e about as appealing as a psycho, clingy, Fatal Attraction girlfriend. It doesn't fit my group's playstyle nearly as well as 1e/2e or 4e does, and its needlessly convoluted and clunky to run or play. No thanks. Not to mention nobody around I know (about 100 gamers total) here is interested in or playing 3e or Pathfinder (most have played in the past, but got it out of their systems long ago). Some of the 3e offshoots are still fairly popular around these parts though, like Spycraft, True 20, and Conan- I'd play any of those.
As for 3e, no way in hell. Been there, done that, and I find 3e about as appealing as a psycho, clingy, Fatal Attraction girlfriend. It doesn't fit my group's playstyle nearly as well as 1e/2e or 4e does, and its needlessly convoluted and clunky to run or play. No thanks. Not to mention nobody around I know (about 100 gamers total) here is interested in or playing 3e or Pathfinder (most have played in the past, but got it out of their systems long ago). Some of the 3e offshoots are still fairly popular around these parts though, like Spycraft, True 20, and Conan- I'd play any of those.
Last edited:
i edited it to make it clear i was speaking of pre-3.0 versions of D&D
Similar Threads
